MEDIA CONCENTRATION A GROWING CONCERN

It's not hard to understand the forces behind corporate mergers, and in the go-go economy we've had for most of the '90s, hordes of cash and appreciated stock values have made mega-deals more and more commonplace. Consequently, it wasn't altogether surprising to hear that Viacom, an entertainment company, was buying television network CBS for almost $36 billion.
The theory behind this deal is that by buying CBS, which also holds a majority stake in a radio station network and outdoor billboard company, Viacom becomes a pervasive media force capable of creating programming for a wide network of commercial television stations and cross-promoting all its offerings across a broad band of media outlets to nearly every age group in the U.S. consumer market.
It's not unlike the old 'cradle-to-grave' business plan of General Motors. Get the entry-level buyer into a Chevrolet and then, as his income and tastes advanced, move him up through the broad line of GM products, culminating in the Cadillac. That's what CBS Television president Leslie Moonves was referring to when he talked, in an interview after the merger was announced, of reaching 'them.'
'We have them from the time they're 2 years old (cable TV's Nickelodeon) until the time they're 80,' when they'll watch CBS's mainstream programming, Mr. Moonves said.
Not to mention the music video stations MTV and VH-1, movie studio Paramount Pictures...well, you get the picture. This merged company will be everywhere in American popular culture -- which is exactly what troubles some people.
Mark Miller, a media studies professor at New York University, was quoted as saying the negative implications of the Viacom-CBS deal would be enormous.
'It seems to me that this is, by any definition, an undemocratic development,' Mr. Miller said. 'The media system in a democracy should not be inordinately dominated by a few very powerful interests.'
While I'm not sure of the threats to American democracy of 'Ru
grats' promos appearing on CBS TV stations or on Infinity Broadcasting radio stations, there is something troubling about this proposed concentration of so many media outlets in the hands of a single company.
One company can put the message of its choice in front of every age group in America through a staggering assortment of media forms. If regulators can be satisfied there isn't an inherent danger in that prospect, then look for other major media companies to rush to make similar deals.
The irony of all of this is that the government, in changing the old rules that prohibited such concentration of media ownership, created a scenario in which Viacom, the then-cable company CBS sold off three decades ago, has returned to gobble up its esteemed parent.
Before approving this and the other media mergers that surely would follow, the federal government must do all it can to ensure that these multimedia monopolies serve the interests of the American populace as well as their own stockholders.